IPCC:accomplishments,controversies and challenges

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has successfully produced four assessment reports since 1990 along with a number of special reports and greenhouse gas inventory guidelines. It has very rigorous and robust procedures and guidelines for preparing the assessment reports largely based on synthesis of peer-reviewed and published scientific literature. IPCC has attracted controversy since the Second Assessment Report of 1995. The recent controversies surrounding the IPCC reports surfaced nearly two years after the release of the report in 2007, especially in the wake of the crucial Copenhagen Climate Convention. Many of the controversies can be traced to the use of information sourced from reports published outside the scientific journals such as reports of the World Wildlife Fund. It is true that there are a few errors in the IPCC reports, which may have escaped the multilayered rigorous review process. Many of the errors found in the main reports, which are over a thousand page each, have not been quoted in the crucial and most referred Summary for Policy Makers. IPCC may have to develop a more robust policy for sourcing literature published outside the scientific journals. The United Nations Secretary General has requested the prestigious Inter-Academy Council to review the IPCC principles, procedures and guidelines. The controversies raised in the recent past do not in any way change the main conclusions of the IPCC Assessment Report.

From Bathymetry to Bioshields: A Review of Post-Tsunami Ecological Research in India and its Implications for Policy

More than half a decade has passed since the December 26th 2004 tsunami hit the Indian coast leaving a trail of ecological, economic and human destruction in its wake. We reviewed the coastal ecological research carried out in India in the light of the tsunami. In addition, we also briefly reviewed the ecological research in other tsunami affected countries in Asia namely Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Thailand and Maldives in order to provide a broader perspective of ecological research after tsunami. A basic search in ISI Web of Knowledge using keywords ``tsunami'' and ``India'' resulted in 127 peer reviewed journal articles, of which 39 articles were pertaining to ecological sciences. In comparison, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Thailand and Maldives had, respectively, eight, four, 21 and two articles pertaining to ecology. In India, bioshields received the major share of scientific interest (14 out of 39) while only one study (each) was dedicated to corals, seagrasses, seaweeds and meiofauna, pointing to the paucity of research attention dedicated to these critical ecosystems. We noted that very few interdisciplinary studies looked at linkages between pure/applied sciences and the social sciences in India. In addition, there appears to be little correlation between the limited research that was done and its influence on policy in India. This review points to gap areas in ecological research in India and highlights the lessons learnt from research in other tsunami-affected countries. It also provides guidance on the links between science and policy that are required for effective coastal zone management.